Last year, more job-seekers applied for jobs with companies that regul

Question

Last year, more job-seekers applied for jobs with companies that regularly investigate their employees’ personal medical histories than for jobs with companies that rarely do so. As a group, last year’s job applicants were obviously unconcerned about the privacy of their medical records.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument above?

(A) A common reason employers review employee medical files is to check for health problems that disqualify employees from receiving health-insurance benefits.

(B) Job applicants have no way of knowing whether a prospective employer investigates its employees’ medical histories.

(C) A certain proposed law, if enacted, would make it easier for employers to gain access to the medical histories of their employees.

(D) Information about which companies investigate their employees’ medical histories, and which do not, is widely available to job seekers.

(E) The number of people applying for jobs last year was significantly greater than during most years.

Source:  Master GMAT

Nipungupta9081 · Answer

IMO B

(A) A common reason employers review employee medical files is to check for health problems that disqualify employees from receiving health-insurance benefits. - IRRELEVANT. ( X )

(B) Job applicants have no way of knowing whether a prospective employer investigates its employees’ medical histories. ( ✔ )

(C) A certain proposed law, if enacted, would make it easier for employers to gain access to the medical histories of their employees. - OUT OF SCOPE ( X )

(D) Information about which companies investigate their employees’ medical histories, and which do not, is widely available to job seekers. - ( X )

(E) The number of people applying for jobs last year was significantly greater than during most years. - IRRELEVANT ( X )

Posted from my mobile device

ananya3 · Answer

IMO B

P1: more job-seekers applied for jobs with companies that regularly investigate their employees’ personal medical histories than for jobs with companies that rarely do so.

Conclusion: applicants were obviously unconcerned about the privacy of their medical records.

Note to self: the only reason the applicants applied more for jobs with companies that investigate their medical history is because they are unconcered of their privacy

(A) A common reason employers review employee medical files is to check for health problems that disqualify employees from receiving health-insurance benefits. -   incorrect  
Irrelevant to the argument. We need to find why employees still apply to these jobs

(B) Job applicants have no way of knowing whether a prospective employer investigates its employees’ medical histories. -   correct  
If they have no way of knowing then the more application has nothing to do with people being unconcerned about their privacy

(C) A certain proposed law, if enacted, would make it easier for employers to gain access to the medical histories of their employees.-   incorrect  
Irrelevant to the argument. We need to find why employees still apply to these jobs

(D) Information about which companies investigate their employees’ medical histories, and which do not, is widely available to job seekers. -   incorrect  
This supports the argument in a way

(E) The number of people applying for jobs last year was significantly greater than during most years. -   incorrect  
Out of scope. We are not comparing the statistics for different years

Posted from my mobile device

cchen679 · Answer

Answer is  (B) Job applicants have no way of knowing whether a prospective employer investigates its employees’ medical histories .

The argument here is stating that last year's job applicants were unconcerned about their medical record privacy because more of those applicants applied to jobs that investigates their employee's personal medical histories than not. (B) severely weakens this argument because if the applicants had no way of knowing whether an employer was going to investigate them, then they couldn't of consciously made a decision on whether or not to apply to a job that checked their medical records.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Official Explanation

The argument relies on the assumption that job applicants know which employers regularly investigate employee medical histories and which ones don’t—but disregard this distinction in deciding to which companies they’ll apply.  Choice (B)  directly refutes this assumption.

The correct answer is (B).

Last year, more job-seekers applied for jobs with companies that regul

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Last year, more job-seekers applied for jobs with companies that regul

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards